Ice Shelf Collapses
Posted by
Kevin
New satellite images reveal what scientists call the “runaway” collapse of an enormous ice shelf in Antarctica as the result of global warming.
The chunk of coastal ice was some 160 square miles (415 square kilometers) in area—about seven times the size of Manhattan.
… “The collapse underscores that the [Wilkins Ice Shelf] region has experienced an intense melt season. Regional sea ice has all but vanished, leaving the ice shelf exposed to the action of waves.”David Vaughan of the British Antarctic Survey noted that the larger formation from which the chunk detached—the Wilkins Ice Shelf—could itself collapse in 15 years.
Global warming deniers to appear in 5 … 4 … 3 ….
What the heck is wrong with us humans causing all of this destruction. Yes i KNow that some of us try to hel but i mean seriously we all need to pitch in so that our planet doesnt get a giant hole in hte ozine which wil toast us like my breakfast
Comment 3/26/2008
The ozone hole is unrelated to global warming on most degrees (global warming is likely to result in increased levels of ozone in the stratosphere, CFCs present a rather minor warming hazard, potentially negated by their ability to turn ozone into oxygen-oxygen pairs and thus reduce the warming potential there). In addition, the ozone holes are pretty much taken care of at this point — the one at the south pole is projected to be back to pre-1980 values by the mid-2085, about as early as can be expected without conquering the various developing countries and forcing them to avoid using CFCs or other similar chlorines.
It’s rather frustrating how often people get these things mixed up. I blame the media.
Anywho, seven times the size of Manhattan is an ice cube compared to the rest of the shelf, if that much. The ‘western’ side’s been melting for a while, and the ‘eastern’ side and central core of the continent’s been getting significantly larger. This isn’t really news.
Comment 3/26/2008
You could have the decency to wait until the record snow melts in this country before you restart your global warming rants. It has been nice to have a little break from the gloom and doom global warming crowd for a few months.
Comment 3/26/2008
Conflating local weather and global climate. Not good science. This past winter is projecting to be one of the 10 warmest on record, both in the US and the northern hemisphere.
Note that in the northern US, the average temp could rise 6 or 8 degrees and have zero impact on snowfall in the sense it would still be cold enough to snow all winter. So record snowfalls in those regions are completely meaningless indicators of global warming trends.
These are difficult concepts for some folks, thankfully not for most folks.
Comment 3/26/2008
http://www.greendaily.com/2008/03/24/nasa-scientists-puzzled-as-data-show-oceans-actually-cooling/
Interesting. Maybe the computer models need some tweaking. What I do find odd though, is that I keep getting told scientists will follow where the evidence leads but I don’t see that happening.
Comment 3/26/2008
This past winter is projecting to be one of the 10 warmest on record, both in the US and the northern hemisphere.
Proof please.
Comment 3/26/2008
Big U:
Read the original article as opposed to the summation you linked, and you’ll see that the headline gives a false impression of what they’re actually finding. For one thing, your site fails to note that the underlying article says all of the other indicators — sea level rise, etc. — are consistent with warming, indicating that they may be misinterpreting the temperature data they’re getting, or that their sample size isn’t large enough (e.g., the warming is occurring deeper than their instruments can go).
Comment 3/26/2008
“Conflating local weather and global climate. Not good science.”
Sarcasm is beyond some people.
Comment 3/26/2008
I must have been on drugs earlier. I can not find the link to the article about the winter temp, and now see that the winter was just slightly above average in temp, not in top 10 warmest. As Hillary would say, I misspoke.
Comment 3/26/2008
Ted:
I must be on the same drugs, because I recall seeing something similar. But I can’t find it either.
Comment 3/26/2008
I believe I saw something similar to that reported, but later altered. Using very recent information can be very problematic when you’ve got that many different initial sources.
That’s generally not true, even within the limits of being below 0 degrees Celsius. By the very nature of having temperatures above 0, you’re going to normally find some days that were on the border line sometime between Fall and Winter and later between Winter and Spring, and at least one of those is going to fall within 6-8 degrees of freezing water.
In a more useful viewpoint, weather actually needs ‘warmer’ weather to have snow — if it’s below freezing for eight thousand miles in every direction from Point A, most climate is going to run out of actual water long before it gets close. That’s a (vastly) simplified explanation of just one aspect, but it’s a non-trivial one: it’s why the center and ‘eastern’ side of the Antarctic are gaining ice.
Comment 3/26/2008
Gatt, Clarification that I’m talking 6 to 8 degrees fahrenheit, not Celsius. I will substitute the word “virtually” for “zero” to address your concern.
Comment 3/26/2008
Tgirsch> I’m not saying climate change is not happening (though I do contend there is still not enough knowledge about all aspects to create computer models that are accurate). All I am saying is that here is a program in place that was designed by scientists to do something very specific. Now when the results are different, a number of scientists seem to be assuming that there are problems with the data or their interpretation of the data, but none are saying the computer models may need to be looked at. Some things are showing evidence of global warming, while others are showing contradictory results but they seem to want to throw out the contradictory results or explain them away.
Therefore, it appears to me that they are not following the evidence to where it leads, but rather hoping that they can manipulate the evidence to say what they want to believe. That’s the way it appears to me.
Comment 3/27/2008